From saizai@gmail.com Fri Nov 10 10:30:22 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-board); Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gib8n-0005hH-6e for llg-board@lojban.org; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:30:20 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id c2so570563ugf for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:30:11 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=MakX7IWs0FZVDW3mwlkrGIUI1isy/ZDbSIwzvnwVnVmQXJS2MwuqYBiIoPyzxIwBhc/nCJSY9BjkoEveB1SzD5bVLywGyxB99q6ka1dEY2ZJkkrXawivbfzDhTKZaYealsw52RIl5yYJXADHhBYxwOEI1qkz8wsRm7SNs6WKidM= Received: by 10.78.170.17 with SMTP id s17mr2901458hue.1163183410723; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:30:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.105.17 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:30:10 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <646661980611101030u394d0b21g31ae04cffd6771dd@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 10:30:10 -0800 From: "Sai Emrys" To: "Arnt Richard Johansen" Subject: [llg-board] Re: LCS Board of Directors Cc: llg-board@lojban.org, lawrence@kli.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <646661980611092145v5b6fb776kda383b3014cea837@mail.gmail.com> <646661980611101010h1077e79cu6e8569799ae4ce87@mail.gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: bd0317d5b9eeb2fb X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 258 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-board-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sai@saizai.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-board@lojban.org X-list: llg-board On 11/10/06, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote: > Oh, okay. From the wording of your message, it sounded a bit like the LCS > would act as an umbrella organisation of the LLG, the KLI and other > organisations of its kin, with our officers serving on the LCS board ex > officio. We have had some discussions in the LLG board today about the > appropriateness of such a relationship, but this seems a moot point now. I think that that may indeed be a good thing, but obviously it is up to you. If we were to do it, I would prefer that the LLG, KLI, et al operate essentially as mostly-independent entities anyhow. - Sai